How alarmed should we be about Europe's tightening citizenship rules?
In recent months, several countries in Europe have announced plans, or said they are at least considering, new rules on obtaining citizenship.
In Sweden, an inquiry recently proposed
extending the residency requirement
to eight years from the current five, and since April 1st, the Migration Agency has toughened
security checks
on applicants, which led to a
temporary freeze on the processing of applications
. Sweden has also talked of
introducing language and civics tests
for citizenship applicants.
Last year, Finland extended the required residency period for naturalisation from five to eight years and shortened the time limits for allowed absence.
In Germany, the new government has passed a bill to scrap the
fast-track path
to citizenship, which requires only three years of residence for people considered "highly integrated'. The bill, which still needs the approval of the Bundestag, reverses part of the citizenship reform adopted in 2024.
In Italy, a
referendum
aiming to reduce the residency requirement to get citizenship didn't receive enough participation to be valid. Separately, the parliament recently adopted new rules that limit to two generations the possibility to obtain citizenship
by ancestry
.
In Denmark authorities hiked the
citizenship fee
by 50 percent on May 1st. Months earlier the country's Immigration Ministry also appointed an expert panel to look into the possibility of
screening
applicants for views considered 'antidemocratic'.
Elsewhere in the Nordics, Norway
will hold a general election in September, and both the Conservative Party and Progress Party, which could form a right-wing coalition, said they want to tighten citizenship requirements.
Advertisement
In France, where the anti-immigration far-right has been growing in popularity in recent years, the country's Interior M
inister
Bruno Retailleau t
alked of his plans to 'toughen up' the citizenship regime
, including the possible addition of a history and civic test.
Nationality reforms were also at the centre of the political agenda in the Netherlands, where the far-right government, which has recently collapsed, wanted to increase the residence requirement from five to ten years. A similar plan to lengthen the residency qualification period has been taken by the Labour government in the UK, as part of proposals to further tighten immigration rules.
Why so many changes?
Professor Maarten Vink, Chair of Citizenship Studies at the Robert Schuman Centre, European University Institute in Florence, suggested citizens around Europe shouldn't be too alarmed at all the tightening and changing of the rules.
'It is quite common that countries change citizenship rules every couple of years," Vink said.
'We are in a democracy, so if in elections the political balance shifts, it is normal that this is reflected in legislation. When migration is a very important topic in politics, issues that are related to migration, such as citizenship, are also part of this dynamic,' he said.
Professor Vink said that citizenship laws in Europe have recently been 'more dynamic than in other parts of the world', although 'changes go in different directions.'
Advertisement
Dual citizenship
The most significant trend that has emerged, and is 'unidirectional', he argued, is the acceptance of dual citizenship.
'Back in the 1960s, most countries around the world restricted dual citizenship because this was seen as a problem of loyalty and allegiance, especially at times of more warfare and military conscription," said Vink.
Although exceptions remain in Austria, the Netherlands, the Baltic countries and several Eastern European states, this is an area that has seen 'a very clear liberalisation trend globally and in Europe'.
Vink said this was partly driven by migration as more people moved and built a life in another country and maintained family ties to the country where they came from, or where their parents and grandparents came from.
Another factor was gender equality.
Advertisement
'In the past, a woman marrying a man from another country would automatically become a citizen of that country, or lose hers, and the children would be only citizen of the father's country. Recognising a woman and a man as both independent in citizenship law, as it happened in all European countries, allowed for the creation of mixed citizenship families,' he explained.
Vink points out that even the new German government, which has proposed a step back on the "modernisation'" of citizenship laws by
removing a fast-track procedure
, has agreed to maintain the main elements of the landmark 2024 reform – the acceptance of dual citizenship and the reduction of the residency requirement from eight to five years.
Developments in family law also affect citizenship, for example with the right to transmit citizenship from the non-biological parent to a child in a same-sex family.
'Scandinavian countries have been very proactive in incorporating these family law elements in citizenship law, while in countries like Italy there are still restrictions,' Vink said.
Crucially most governments in Europe can't just do anything they want when it comes to citizenship laws
In most European countries the area is also regulated via
the European Convention on Nationality
, signed in 1997 under the Council of Europe (not an EU institution). Some 29 European countries signed the Convention, but 8 (Croatia, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Poland and Russia) have not ratified it.
For example under the rules set by the convention, the residence requirement for citizenship cannot exceed 10 years, an upper limit that is met by all European countries, with the most common requirement set at 5 years.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Local Germany
4 days ago
- Local Germany
How alarmed should we be about Europe's tightening citizenship rules?
In recent months, several countries in Europe have announced plans, or said they are at least considering, new rules on obtaining citizenship. In Sweden, an inquiry recently proposed extending the residency requirement to eight years from the current five, and since April 1st, the Migration Agency has toughened security checks on applicants, which led to a temporary freeze on the processing of applications . Sweden has also talked of introducing language and civics tests for citizenship applicants. Last year, Finland extended the required residency period for naturalisation from five to eight years and shortened the time limits for allowed absence. In Germany, the new government has passed a bill to scrap the fast-track path to citizenship, which requires only three years of residence for people considered "highly integrated'. The bill, which still needs the approval of the Bundestag, reverses part of the citizenship reform adopted in 2024. In Italy, a referendum aiming to reduce the residency requirement to get citizenship didn't receive enough participation to be valid. Separately, the parliament recently adopted new rules that limit to two generations the possibility to obtain citizenship by ancestry . In Denmark authorities hiked the citizenship fee by 50 percent on May 1st. Months earlier the country's Immigration Ministry also appointed an expert panel to look into the possibility of screening applicants for views considered 'antidemocratic'. Elsewhere in the Nordics, Norway will hold a general election in September, and both the Conservative Party and Progress Party, which could form a right-wing coalition, said they want to tighten citizenship requirements. Advertisement In France, where the anti-immigration far-right has been growing in popularity in recent years, the country's Interior M inister Bruno Retailleau t alked of his plans to 'toughen up' the citizenship regime , including the possible addition of a history and civic test. Nationality reforms were also at the centre of the political agenda in the Netherlands, where the far-right government, which has recently collapsed, wanted to increase the residence requirement from five to ten years. A similar plan to lengthen the residency qualification period has been taken by the Labour government in the UK, as part of proposals to further tighten immigration rules. Why so many changes? Professor Maarten Vink, Chair of Citizenship Studies at the Robert Schuman Centre, European University Institute in Florence, suggested citizens around Europe shouldn't be too alarmed at all the tightening and changing of the rules. 'It is quite common that countries change citizenship rules every couple of years," Vink said. 'We are in a democracy, so if in elections the political balance shifts, it is normal that this is reflected in legislation. When migration is a very important topic in politics, issues that are related to migration, such as citizenship, are also part of this dynamic,' he said. Professor Vink said that citizenship laws in Europe have recently been 'more dynamic than in other parts of the world', although 'changes go in different directions.' Advertisement Dual citizenship The most significant trend that has emerged, and is 'unidirectional', he argued, is the acceptance of dual citizenship. 'Back in the 1960s, most countries around the world restricted dual citizenship because this was seen as a problem of loyalty and allegiance, especially at times of more warfare and military conscription," said Vink. Although exceptions remain in Austria, the Netherlands, the Baltic countries and several Eastern European states, this is an area that has seen 'a very clear liberalisation trend globally and in Europe'. Vink said this was partly driven by migration as more people moved and built a life in another country and maintained family ties to the country where they came from, or where their parents and grandparents came from. Another factor was gender equality. Advertisement 'In the past, a woman marrying a man from another country would automatically become a citizen of that country, or lose hers, and the children would be only citizen of the father's country. Recognising a woman and a man as both independent in citizenship law, as it happened in all European countries, allowed for the creation of mixed citizenship families,' he explained. Vink points out that even the new German government, which has proposed a step back on the "modernisation'" of citizenship laws by removing a fast-track procedure , has agreed to maintain the main elements of the landmark 2024 reform – the acceptance of dual citizenship and the reduction of the residency requirement from eight to five years. Developments in family law also affect citizenship, for example with the right to transmit citizenship from the non-biological parent to a child in a same-sex family. 'Scandinavian countries have been very proactive in incorporating these family law elements in citizenship law, while in countries like Italy there are still restrictions,' Vink said. Crucially most governments in Europe can't just do anything they want when it comes to citizenship laws In most European countries the area is also regulated via the European Convention on Nationality , signed in 1997 under the Council of Europe (not an EU institution). Some 29 European countries signed the Convention, but 8 (Croatia, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Poland and Russia) have not ratified it. For example under the rules set by the convention, the residence requirement for citizenship cannot exceed 10 years, an upper limit that is met by all European countries, with the most common requirement set at 5 years.
DW
12-06-2025
- DW
Germany updates: Economy expected to see growth boom in 2026 – DW – 06/12/2025
06/12/2025 June 12, 2025 Ifo doubles growth forecast for Germany in 2026 The Munich-based Ifo Institute has raised its economic growth forecast for Germany for 2026. Gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to grow by 1.5%, which would be almost twice as high as the originally forecast 0.8%. The institute said new government measures and a spending surge should boost the country's sluggish economy. The economic institute also adjusted its growth forecast for 2025, raising it to 0.3% from the previous outlook of 0.2%. "The crisis in the German economy reached its low point in the winter half-year," said Timo Wollmershaeuser, the Ifo's head of forecasts. "One reason for the growth spurt is the fiscal measures announced by the new German government," he added. Germany's cabinet last week approved a €46 billion ($52.94 billion) tax relief package to support companies and boost the economy from 2025 through 2029. That came after Germany's parliament, the Bundestag, approved a massive spending surge in March when it made a historic decision to amend a national fiscal rule known as the "debt brake." Defense spending above 1% of GDP will no longer be subject to any borrowing limits. In its forecast, the Ifo Institute estimated those measures to boost the economy by €10 billion in 2025 and €57 billion in 2026. Wollmershaeuser also warned, however, that the improved forecast was largely based on assumptions that the trade war between the European Union and US President Donald Trump would be resolved. "The increasing optimism is probably also fueled by the hope that the new coalition will end the economic policy stalemate and that an agreement will be reached in the trade dispute with the US," he said. The institute also predicted an uptick of one percentage point this year. Wollmershaeuser pointed out that "the crisis in the German economy has been over for some time, but the recovery is still very weak." "The economy is still struggling with the effects of the pandemic and the high inflation rate."
Local Germany
06-06-2025
- Local Germany
OPINION: It's high time Germany scrapped the rent brake
As Bundestag debates the planned second extension of Mietpreisbremse rent controls until 2029 and is almost certain to pass it, I have a question: isn't it actually high time we got rid of the 'rent brake'? Your first reaction – especially if you are one of the 50 percent of German households living in rental accommodation – might be to ask back: scrap legislation intended to limit rent price increases at a time when rents are shooting up? What are you, nuts? To which I would answer: rents have been shooting up ever since German cities were given the option of putting controls in place ten years ago. They've risen by almost 40 percent in my part of Hamburg, for instance, as this interactive infographic map illustrates , and Berlin is another story altogether … But surely, you might object, without the Mietpreisbremse , these rises would have been even worse? That can't be proved either way. After observing Germany's increasingly dysfunctional housing market for almost two decades now, however, I'd say: probably not. In fact, my creeping suspicion is that rent controls are ineffectual at best and, at worst, may actually be contributing to rises. Wait, so you think the Mietpreisbremse is making rents higher now…? No, please: hear me out! Ineffective on its own terms First off, experts agree that, even on its own terms, the Mietpreisbremse is ineffective – that's why those in favour of it usually also argue that it needs to be more stringent. In their current form, controls only apply to new rental contracts, and come with enough loopholes and exceptions that any landlord looking for one will find a semi-legal workaround. The easiest option is to either limit the length of the rental contract to less than one year or to part-furnish the letting – which has led to a market where unscrupulous operators are now demanding top-dollar for sticking a flat-pack wardrobe in the bedroom and then coming back for more a year later when the contract needs to be renewed. READ ALSO: Four scams to be aware of while navigating Germany's rental market Theoretically, this shouldn't be happening, of course. In Germany's tenant-friendly housing law, leases can only be time-limited if there is good reason – e.g. if the renter needs a short-term let for professional reasons – and any furnishings need to be high-value enough to warrant higher prices. Advertisement Yet for legal protections to apply, tenants have to know – and exercise – their rights. And as my colleague Paul Krantz has explained , even in simpler cases where the rent has been set too high on a standard lease, many who could challenge it do not – for lack of understanding, lack of time and energy, or lack of confidence confronting a potentially Scrooge-like landlord. A man hangs up his keys in a Berlin apartment. Photo: picture alliance/dpa/dpa-Zentralbild | Kira Hofmann Then there are the grey areas where well-meaning letters can easily end up unintentionally contravening the Mietpreisbremse . Under the rule, rents should not exceed a local average price by more than ten percent in tight housing market areas. But local rental averages are determined in rent price indexs – Mietenspiegel – which themselves are for more complicated than many assume: this is Germany, after all. In Hamburg, for example, figures are declined in a detailed table according to the specific location of buildings and when they were completed, leaving ranges of between €3 and €5 per square metre to take account of amenities such as balconies, bathtubs, and bicycle cellars… What is more, the Mietpreisbremse doesn't apply when significant works have been carried out prior to letting: but what does 'significant' actually mean? You might not be surprised to learn that, in cases which have gone to court, complicated formulae have been applied and a range of factors taken into account… The upshot is now that, to be sure of being able to make back money invested, law-abiding landlords are now likely to have more work done than might be strictly necessary (and then need to set rent even higher to recoup the extra costs…). Others, meanwhile, simply do the place up on the cheap and hope that tenants never challenge them to show their receipts. Setting the wrong incentives Why wouldn't they try? After all, once they are out of Mietpreisbremse territory, the sky is the limit – so the clear incentive for landlords is to look for any way to get an apartment out of regulatory purview and then set rent at market rates. Or, simply, to invest in new-builds, which are wholly exempt from rental controls – and rarely available for under €20 per square metre. Advertisement In this way, the Mietpreisbremse is entrenching a two-speed rental market where high-earning tenants with good credit records have their pick of snazzy new-builds and souped-up Altbau flats while those lower down the socio-economic scale are left fighting for increasingly pricey scraps. As I've written before, it's a trust issue : anyone with a flat to let is now acutely aware that its rental value is capped even as inflation, wages, and market values aren't. So increasingly, landlords max out the 10% the Mietpreisbremse allows – and then make use of all legal options to keep upping the rent. That is one reason so many new rentals are now using the unloved Staffelmiete (defined raises every year) and Indexmiete inflation-linked contracts, which allow for increases of 15 or 20 percent in a three-year period. Previously, it was standard practice – especially among ethically-minded private owners – to issue standard contracts and leave rents more or less untouched for sitting tenants before upping them on re-letting. Now, as rents continue to soar but the Mietpreisbremse limits raises, many private landlords are, perversely, having to hike rents in existing leases to avoid trouble with the Finanzamt further down the line: not charging market rates is, of course, considered a form of tax avoidance. These in-tenancy rises then drag up the averages on which the 10 percent maximum is calculated, and so the 'rent brake' is being applied at the same time as the price accelerator. Advertisement Overly-complex – and potentially unconstitutional This reveals the fundamental problem with rental controls. Like it or not, Germany's rental market is just that – a market. Yet by selling off swathes of social housing stock over recent decades, many major cities have deprived themselves of the best means of slowing price rises in this market -- offering affordable rental accommodation to those who need it. Instead, they now find themselves shelling out huge sums in housing benefit – Wohngeld – to low-income households and hoping that middle-income tenants have the gumption and courage to apply the complicated Mietpreisbremse themselves. All of this, meanwhile, puts the majority of well-meaning landlords at a disadvantage and encourages those with the ways and means to maximise revenue (or to simply ignore the system). No wonder rents are going up faster than ever. A view of flats in Hamburg. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Daniel Bockwoldt So for me, it's simple: the Mietpreisbremse should be scrapped. Even in this market, asking rents currently can't go much higher – prospective tenants can no longer afford them on their wages – and there is every reason to suspect that the legislation may actually have pushed prices to this point faster than would otherwise have been the case. This, in turn, is contributing to stasis as people are forced to stay put and make do , with vacancies in most cities far below the 1 percent generally considered the minimum necessary for a functioning rental market. What is more, the Mietpreisbremse will eventually become unconstitutional: in our market economy, the state is not allowed to use price-fixing legislation to force a lasting devaluation of assets. Advertisement Thus far, Karlsruhe has accepted the rent controls because they are temporary, being implemented for defined periods of time. Yet when this planned extension reaches its term in 2029, the measures will have been in place for almost 15 years – making them 'temporary' in the same way that the exceptionally ugly shelving unit I 'temporarily' put in my hallway when we moved in 2010 is still 'temporary' one-and-a-half decades on. Mercifully, we haven't had our rent raised since then. Then again, we moved in before the Mietpreisbremse and paid top-whack in the first few years. That's how things used to work. Our newer neighbours, however, all seem to get regular rent increases. Call me crazy, but…
